Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

So David Cameron (we are in it together) really wants to fuck up our children then!

660 replies

belleMarie · 23/06/2012 23:14

How can anyone be taken in by this muppet? whilst him, Sam (and her £1000 pound frocks) and kiddies eat good, sleep good, shit good - we're basically screwed?

His hate for the poor/have-not is staggering and apart from a a couple of grunts here and there, this man is unstoppable.

Cameron to axe housing benefits for feckless under 25s as he declares war on welfare culture
Prime Minister gives exclusive interview to the MAIL ON SUNDAY
Reveals housing benefit will be scrapped for under 25s, who'll be forced to live with their parents
Dole money will be stopped for those who refuse to find work
Mr Cameron shares his views on Euro2012, Jimmy Carr, and what really happened when he left his daughter in the pub

Radical new welfare cuts targeting feckless couples who have children and expect to live on state handouts will be proposed by David Cameron tomorrow.
His bold reforms could also lead to 380,000 people under 25 being stripped of housing benefits and forced to join the growing number of young adults who still live with their parents.
In a keynote speech likely to inflame tensions with his deputy Nick Clegg, the Prime Minister will call for a debate on the welfare state, focusing on reforms to ?working-age benefits?.

Among the ideas being considered by Mr Cameron are:
Scrapping most of the £1.8 billion in housing benefits paid to 380,000 under-25s, worth an average £90 a week, forcing them to support themselves or live with their parents.
Stopping the £70-a-week dole money for the unemployed who refuse to try hard to find work or produce a CV.
Forcing a hardcore of workshy claimants to do community work after two years on the dole ? or lose all their benefits.
Well-placed sources say Ministers are also taking a fresh look at plans to limit child benefit to a couple?s first three children, although Mr Cameron is not expected to address this issue directly tomorrow.
Speaking exclusively to The Mail on Sunday, Mr Cameron said: ?We are sending out strange signals on working, housing and fa8milies.?

He argued that some young people lived with their parents, worked hard, planned ahead and got nothing from the State, while others left home, made little effort to seek work and got a home paid for by the benefits system.

?A couple will say, ?We are engaged, we are both living with our parents, we are trying to save before we get married and have children and be good parents. But how does it make us feel, Mr Cameron, when we see someone who goes ahead, has the child, gets the council home, gets the help that isn?t available to us???
?One is trapped in a welfare system that discourages them from working, the other is doing the right thing and getting no help.?
Asked if he would take action against large families who were paid large sums in benefits, he replied:
?This is a difficult area but it is right to pose questions about it. At the moment the system encourages people not to work and have children, but we should help people to work AND have children.?
His plan to axe housing benefit for the under-25s will have exemptions for special cases, such as domestic violence, but he said: ?We are spending nearly £2 billion on housing benefit for under-25s ? a fortune. We need a bigger debate about welfare and what we expect of people. The system currently sends the signal you are better off not working, or working less.?
He also favours new curbs on the Jobseeker?s Allowance, demanding the unemployed do more to find work. He said: ?We aren?t even asking them, ?Have you got a CV ready to go?? ? A small minority of hardcore workshy, an estimated 5,000 to 10,000, could be forced to take part in community work if they fail or refuse to find work or training after two years.
The Prime Minister wants to show he is committed to radical policies, but his speech could exacerbate strains with Coalition partner Mr Clegg, whose Lib Dems oppose drastic welfare cuts.
It follows the row over plans to revive O-levels and will fuel rumours the Coalition could end long before the 2015 Election. ?As leader of a political party as well as running a Coalition it?s right sometimes to make a more broad-ranging speech,? said Mr Cameron.
A Government official said: ?Decent folk are fed up with the increasing abuse of the welfare system. Responsible people who work damned hard, often on low incomes, to support themselves, are sick and tired of seeing others do nothing and live off the state.
?Labour threw ever greater sums of money at the problem and made it worse. If we want to encourage responsibility we have be bold enough to tackle these issues. We suspect some of those who refuse point-blank to seek work are working on the black market and claiming fraudulently.?
But a Labour source said: ?It is easy for rich Tories with big houses to have grown-up children at home while they find their feet. It?s different if you live in a tiny council flat and your daughter is a single mum.? Ministers said curbs on housing benefit for the under-25s, had helped slash the welfare bill in Germany and Holland

OP posts:
Socknickingpixie · 24/06/2012 17:45

marriedinwhite how on earth has she played the system? At 20 odd years old and with a 2 year old there is no reason for her not to use social housing, it's there for people who cannot use private.

If my eldest daughter had a child she also would be more than welcome to move back home infact she's welcome back under any circumstances but I wouldn't have thought any parent would actually want to be forced to live in there own parents home especially when you concider the relationship dynamics to the child/grandchild loads of suituations like that can mean the parent struggles to parent given that GP is there in there parental role to the parent it can lead to all manor of issues

marriedinwhite · 24/06/2012 17:50

Because she got pregnant on purpose in the first place when there was not a stable relationship and she has parents who would not dream of kicking her out onto the streets. Suits them all doesn't it. If she had done things honestly and in the right order, she wouldn't be entitled to a council flat. Her parents didn't teach her right from wrong and honesty in a relationship and they should have to take some responsibility and suffer some inconvenience for that. Better her parents pay for her mistakes in my opinion than the tax payer who has brought up their children to act responsibly. It is just too easy and there is a section of society that maximises that ease to its maximum benefit.

LineRunner · 24/06/2012 17:53

Sparks, Yes I take your point.

LineRunner · 24/06/2012 17:55

I have genuinely learnt one thing on MN over the past year - that entitlement to social housing is commonly and significantly misunderstood.

sesameflower · 24/06/2012 17:57

well put linerunner

Glitterknickaz · 24/06/2012 17:57

MumOfMillie I have reported your vile posts towards jellytotsandcolabottles. Using another poster's circumstances to make digs to suit your ideology is a personal attack in its lowest form.

It's disgusting.

Socknickingpixie · 24/06/2012 18:06

Hummmmmm oh ok because council flats are so lovely and in such great condition that they are something to aspire to, that is the most laughable thing I ever heard they are basic often falling well below what people with a choice would concider acceptable and many are left in unhealthy conditions with mold damp and the such like.

I'm sooooo jealious of her.

How do you know she got pregnant intentionally she could have been on the pill the only compleatly effective contaception is having no sex, the she tricked me attitude is twatish and immature 2 people have sex that makes it the responsability of both parties and if they are legally adults then it's totally not up to there parents both parties could have taken equal responsability. And perhaps her parents could have her at home how long would you expect that to continue?

carernotasaint · 24/06/2012 18:07

Hmm. Just had a thought. IF they do away with Housing Benefits for under 25s, supporters of workfare will no longer be able to argue that under 25s who have been forced into workfare are working for their housing benefits as part of the package as they will no longer be recieving it!
Sooo therefore they really will be working for their JSA so the exploitation of workfare will be even worse than it is now.

LineRunner · 24/06/2012 18:21

The message I'm hearing for under 25s is, if you are poorly paid or unable to find a job, live with your parents - even if your parent can't afford to house you because they rented out your room to a lodger because they need the income.

Also, as said upthread, this really buggers the foster carer recruitment programmes, doesn't it? 'Kids gone to uni? Got a spare room?' 'Erm, no. I got downsized and I have to have my 24 year old son home soon to sleep on the sofa because he got laid off.'

ShellyBoobs · 24/06/2012 18:28

I'm not sure at all that an age limit will be introduced for HB. It's quite possible that it's just posturing by Cameron to improve his party's ratings in the short term.

The opinion polls showed the Cons gaining popularity when the idea of capping benefits was first mooted.

It's the same reason that Labour are in favour of caps.

AThingInYourLife · 24/06/2012 18:33

The message I'm hearing for the under 25s is: piss off and emigrate, we don't want you. You have no future in this country.

You will leave education saddled with debt, no effort will be made to create jobs for you to do, the scandalous cost of housing will not be tackled, you can't rely on any kind of pension provision, and the health service will not be free for much longer.

We have no need of your energy, your talents, your ingenuity and compassion.

We'll just take what we can from you but leave you no country worth inheriting.

:( :( :(

The policies if this government are wasting our young people. It's fucking shameful.

AThingInYourLife · 24/06/2012 18:34

I'm not at all sure an age cap for HB would be legal.

I agree with Shelly that it's just posturing.

noddyholder · 24/06/2012 18:34

I am really worried looking at my 18 yr old and his mates none of them can find a p/time job in spite of looking and looking. I agree they are being dealt a shit hand I can't see a way out for them. Uni is going to fleece them too and there are NO JOBS

YoYoYoItsTillyMinto · 24/06/2012 18:45

sock fair enough but then neither should a 25 yo who can live with their parents.

AThingInYourLife · 24/06/2012 19:11

Why should age have anything to do with it?

The logic of this move (and a lot of current Tory policies) is to change the relationship with the welfare state from one individuals to one with families.

If 24 year olds can be pushed back onto their families, why not 34 year olds?

That's where this stuff is heading: removing individual entitlements and replacing them with bare minimum provision for the utterly destitute without families to help them out.

gordyslovesheep · 24/06/2012 19:16

we will all be welcoming our 80 year old parents back into our homes then ...why should the state support them?

ShellyBoobs · 24/06/2012 19:17

If 24 year olds can be pushed back onto their families, why not 34 year olds?

It's possibly as simple as a minister asking someone to plot a (metaphorical) graph of age group against HB cost and then follow along the axis from 16yo until reaching the first £2bn that could be wiped off.

Hey presto, 25yo...

I wouldn't credit them with putting much more thought into it than that.

oiwheresthecoffee · 24/06/2012 19:17

There already is an age cap. Under 25s are only entitled to the amount that would afford them a room in a shared house. Not full HB for a one bed flat or whatever unless they have a child.

oiwheresthecoffee · 24/06/2012 19:20

Sorry tell a lie , its under 35s now from jan this year see here scroll down.

YoYoYoItsTillyMinto · 24/06/2012 19:20

we are moving to a system where you have to pay in in order to receive benefits. i doubt there are many/any 80yo who have never paid tax.

AThingInYourLife · 24/06/2012 19:21

"Not full HB for a one bed flat or whatever unless they have a child."

Weird thing to do unless you want to encourage people under 25 to have children, which is the opposite of the stated aim of this policy.

oiwheresthecoffee · 24/06/2012 19:23

Thats LHA...its the same i think just for private landlords ? (happy to be corrected)

AThingInYourLife · 24/06/2012 19:23

No, gordy's spot on. There have already been noises about pushing responsibility for elder care onto their families.

Socknickingpixie · 24/06/2012 20:00

yoyo why not? its sensable that people who have no housing costs e.g rent or intrest only mortgage shouldnt get hb because its only ment to be used for those 2 things.

so if you have the cost but dont earn enough to cover it then you are perfectly entitled to claim the benefit, they have laws that cover stuff like payment of this like' the cost of housing yourself and anybody who can reasonably be expected to live with you' so would the ordanary person on the clapham autobus think that having to live with your parents till your 25 because the gov says you have to think thats reasonable?

NowThenWreck · 24/06/2012 20:14

Er...we do pay in order to receive benefits.

I pay tax and NI. I get some housing benefit towards my rent, because if I didn't ds and I would legally be living on less than the law says we need to survive.
And don't forget, if we are bringing Nana into this, that when politicians talk about "shrinking" dismantling the welfare state, a very large percentage of said welfare state is Nana's pension.
Handy for people to forget this fact, much easier and more satisfying to put the entire bill on the "workshy".

There are very few people who are "undeserving" of help. There are many shades of grey, always.
There are people who find themselves jobless through no fault of their own, people who find themselves abandoned with the children, and people who did not manage, or want, the kind of career that enables them to pay rent on a modest flat in the country of their birth.
There are the extremes-the Frank Gallagers, and the Jimmy Carrs, but on the whole most people are doing their best.

You may think you are immune to misfortune tillyminto, but you never know. Most people are only 3 paycheques away from the street.